OOXML: disquiet across the Tasman

Sam Varghese
Monday, 11 February 2008 19:19

Opinion and Analysis

Christie says that responses have often been of poor quality. "If we were to extrapolate (the) poor quality of responses we have seen to the 54 Standard NZ comments to those of all the other NBs then we can only conclude that the result is probably a worse mess than the document we reviewed last August. Of course, that is conjecture because ECMA have yet to release the revised document, despite having made assurances that they would have done by now."

The modified specification, which takes into account the issues raised by standards bodies, is yet to be released - and given that it will be longer than the original 6000 pages, there is hardly any time left for it to be subjected to anything like proper scrutiny. In all, more than 3500 technical flaws and IP issues were identified as needing resolution by Microsoft and ECMA before the March vote.

Christie said the delay to release the revised document was causing concern. "...MS (Microsoft)... simply appear to be running down the clock. They are appearing to engage positively when that seems important (in SNZ meetings, for example) but what actually comes out are endless requests for more technical clarification from experts like Matthew Cruikshank and then very poorly executed responses."

"My personal view is that for a company with Microsoft's seemingly endless resources this is a very cynical ploy. The way ISO and the BRM work is to focus on one single issue at a time and tick each one off as 'resolvable' rather than take a holistic view of the specification.

Cruickshank added: "This isn't an issue of trust (re: promises) it's that the ECMA/Microsoft editor continues to introduce new errors into the standard because they're not technically minded and because their approach hasn't involved the wider document community."

On this side of the Tasman, lobbying efforts by Microsoft are going on apace. The company recently got itself invited to meetings of both the Sydney Linux User Group and the Linux Users of Victoria (one of two Melbourne-based LUGs) where, among other things, it could spruik its case.

Australia abstained from the last vote.